The Roman Tribunal rewrite

Games Discussion Ars Magica
41

Yes, legally, everything is Atlas's, but they have in the past given a sort of blanket permission for fan work provided it is not making any money, which they arguably could withdraw at any time. A couple of the trademarks in the game are used under license, and so technically CCP (the EVE people, who own the White Wolf IP) could wreck the whole thing.

As to "rewriting", sorry it didn't occur to me to say: no, without an explicit permission it would be unwise to use the old book as a core text and just update it: it's got to be a fresh draft, and quoting the previous text to any degree beyond "fair use" would be unwise, because the document trail between Shannon and now might be complex, since the game has changed hands a lot (or it could be as simple as mine, which is that Atlas owns the rights to my texts beyond a handful like moral right to be identified as author and so on).

42

It was first mentioned as having this structure in "Order of Hermes" and so some of the books which are in areas that surround it have this as a minor point. I last mentioned it in "Against the Dark", because the Tremere have a presence there that's supported from Shrouded Bay.

That being said: I think that Johnathan thought Venice was a bigger deal in 1187 than it actually was. Remember, back then, you could play a Jesuit or gypsy in Mythic Europe (order formalised in 1537, as I recall, and Roma aren't a thing yet, although your history may vary.)

43

Sansaron...I can't quite remember what we did to it in the Egypt-North Africa project which in my mind is still a sort of unit, but I have the sensation that it's kind of "dead" or "did not exist". I'd need to check the book...(do we have a parma name for "I have a sick baby and am so tired I can barely type let alone remember canon."?)

44

So, in terms of 5ed canon, it's not so definitive?

45

Given the real world situation of Venice in 1220 AD I'd say it pretty much has to go out the window. Venice was at a state of undeclared war with Sicily fought largely with piracy and was the major motivational force for the 4th crusade going off the rails and sacking Constantinople. If there is any city in Italy which deserves a reputation for being infested with the infernal it would be Venice, and this is further compounded by the fact (noted in City and Guild) that the city is seen as sinful due to its pragmatic approach to commerce which doesn't include wasting money on ostentatious clothing. Nobody would see Venice as a neutral location (though to be fair few would see New York as a neutral location, but that is where the real UN is...)

46

Yes, that's a fair point.

47

I think the idea was that it had been a neutral location for a long time, and the things you mention are due to Hermetic influence, from back when the order were basically doing the Masquerade. It's neutrasl now because it has been neutral since it was poor fisherfolk in them iddle of nowhere fleeing their enemies into a swamp.

48

Not mentioned, so no longer exists, as far as I can tell. At least in BS&S. It could be one of those failed covenants and that is sort of how I intend to treat it. It will mainly exist on paper because it is/was a dedicated covenant set up by the tribunal and from a legal stand point it still has more formal rights than the 'independent' covenants...if we go that way.

I don't know if we have a parma name for it, but it is ok. Just do what you have to get well soon. Take Care

So basically, it is less the UN and more like the old League of Nations. It has served as a neutral grounds for the magi of the tribunal but has since become ineffectual. Oh, and the Jerbiton are really annoyed. Had they been allowed to do their normal 'shtick' in Venice, 'their city' (Constantinople) would not have fallen.

I like that line of thought.

49

Agreed. And as one of those fools who've put their hand up, I suppose I should write a few words about this.
I see this role as mostly one of coordination and facilitation. Keeping track of who's writing what and who needs to talk to whom because their areas overlap - or just border eachother.
Someone who will read your draft and try to offer constructive criticism, and then read it again afterward. Or who will openly admit "I have no clue! I'll try yo ask around if anyone can help you."
And probably someone who will keep track of "NN is having a sick kid, so area QQ is going to have to wait a bit for input. Maybe work on this bit instead?"

I remember looking for it in the playtest drafts and not finding it, so if it's there, it's been snuck in very late in the process.

50

My personal opinion on the structure is that, if you want a coherent book-like thing out of this, you need a project leader to whom all the authors are prepared to give the authority to tell them to completely revise what they have just written. I'd have recommended Timothy, but he doesn't want the job. If your CV doesn't include an ArM book or two, you probably don't have the moral authority to pull it off yet. ("I write as George R. R. Martin" might well work, if true, so I don't say it's impossible. Mind you, if you do write as George R. R. Martin, don't you have something else you should be doing?)

If you want a bunch of largely independent articles on the Rome Tribunal, then you just need enough coordination to avoid two people writing the same thing very often, and to agree that all the authors can use material from each others' articles, to create some sort of linkage. There will be inconsistencies in the vision of the Tribunal, but it could still be very useful and interesting, and would work well as a series of fanzine articles.

Given that there is neither money nor canonical publication kudos waiting, the second option is probably the most practical

51

I'm hoping to be able to mesh things together a bit better than the "bunch of largely independent articles on the Rome Tribunal" but I recognize that this might be problematic with work done on a purely voluntary workforce.

I rather take it that this was not an offer to play project manager, but if Timothy doesn't want the job, this appears to be the only other published Ars Magica author who've shown interest in the project.

52

As I see it the job would entail:
tracking the overall general structure of the tribunal
reading each article both as a traditional editor (check spelling and facts) and to ensure it meshes into other published works as well as the aforementioned tribunal structure
keep track of and assist in determining who writes what portion, reassigning work where necessary

53

Correct Tellus, it was in fact meant to state the opposite than an offer to manage this project.
I may have contributed to published material for Atlas, but always separate parts, stand-alone chapters, never huge, coherent works like a tribunal book.

I'd rather hoped someone as experienced as Timothy Ferguson could take the reins. I don't have the skills and experience to pull this off, and I don't have the time to manage such a project, to read all material written and comment on it etc.
Also, I lack a vision for this book! I'm only now reading the 3rd ed book (I never played in 3rd ed only 4th, and I never opened a tribunal book until I was quite a way into 5th ed) and wow are there a lot of demons everywhere! But where to start?

54

That sounds about right. But before all this I see the following elements needing handling:

*Copyright and legalese issues. What can and can't we do? Do we need to ask or inform anyone?
*Overall vision and concept - what do we want the 5th ed Roman Tribunal to be like? What's the "Hermetic gimmick" in this place?
*References and definitions in canon - what and who in the Roman Tribunal has already been mentioned in 5th ed books. For this to make sense for me, we need to keep true to what has already been written, in 5th ed only.

55

I'm not taking the reins because I think a "book", or even a book-like thing, is not the endgame that will come out of this process.

Also, moral authority only works if people choose to give it, and I really doubt most of the people involved would. I'm not wanting to get abusive here, but, for example, Marko's a good writer you'd sensibly want aboard, but his position in regard to change is diametrically opposite mine: there's no way we could comfortably work together on a project where he had to follow my orders (or I his), and so if he had any sense he'd quite quickly split off and do anything else that's amusing. Similarly, Silveroak's strongly made the point on past threads what he thinks of the current author pool. The idea he'd passively accept orders when I tell him, for example, that the historiography of his real-life faith is wrong, as I've previously done here no the forum. simply can't be supported. There's no way to keep the group together based on moral authority.

You -can- keep the group together just by saying that if Marko wants to write X and I want (not X), then those are both valuable things to have written. Similarly, Silveroak's views could be put in his own little section, and not have to agree with my views.

As David was describing it, that's not a "book"

So, it's all very well to say "Timothy could manage the project, so he should..." but actually, no, I don't think my moral authority would go that far. I'm quite flattered that some of you have contacted me, and I'm willing to be a research resource, and write some material, and beta-read for people, but I really don't see the "Timothy is like David!" structure as working for this, because I'm not David. If you just flake out on me, well, that's not going to stop you writing in the future. I can't pay anyone in money, or in the glory of having a paid writing gig, or in the little tax benefits some people get from being a writer. There's nothing to keep a volunteer in the group except that they happen to be enjoying the writing process, and that's a really unstable way to write when you have something as inherently confrontational as an editor with veto.

I do think the project's a bit nebulous at the moment and it needs:

  • a theme. This can be anything that gives your work a metaphoric structure. So, Covenants was cookbook. AtD was about the American Empire's expansion under Admiral Perry. You need something. The old book had Corruption and it was kind of boring, IMO.
  • a container. Wiki? Project Redcap? Sub Rosa? Blog? Posts here? What are you personally good at now?
  • some sort of central place where people can say they are working on X, and some agreed mechanism of overlap or replacement.

I know people are wanting me to say "Oh, all right then...you've twisted my arm..." but if failing to get the collaborative fiction, and collaborative magic item, and collaborative covenant design projects off the ground has taught me anything, it's that this process is not the book-writing process. The book process, at least from my perspective, is a lot easier than the volunteer/community development process.

56

I think it can be led, but that leadership is very different from an official project leadership.
For one thing you never (even in a professional work) tell someone their faith is wrong and expect them to accept it.
Instead you keep focused on 'what works for the project' and figuring out how to get differing ideas to work together, and check the sources for factuality.
And it was not the author pool I had issues with, it was the fact checking and overall theological-cosmological bias of the system as a whole.
If this is going to work it is going to be through directed collaboration, not a dictatorial approach, which means a book that will likely look very different from what we have seen before.

57

The container should be a book, or something that can be stitched together, printed, bound, and read with no more power requirement than a set of candles.

[size=50](kids these days with their newfangled twit-wikis got no respect for proper ways and can't keep their pants up)[/size]

The format is pretty well established.

Chapter on local history, in this case fairly thin and going back to the Etruscans, with hints of more ancient history; a thin and medieval-POV covering of the Latins, Romans, Greeks, Gauls, etc., with the Cult of Mercury, post-Roman Dark Age, the Order, and such mage-related material interstitched.

Chapter on the local mythic landscape: Faeries (fauns, nymphs, strix, etc); Roman witches and other local magical traditions (of which you can claim any tradition the Romans might have imported); Infernal (careful not to throw all of them out).

Chapters on mundane landscape: the Republics, the Normans, the Empire. Alternately, North, Middle, Southern, and the Islands. One covenant per area, in general, with a few more closely crowded.

As for a theme: I suggest Ruins and Reawakening.

58

I think Timothy Ferguson makes some very good points and I have full respect for him disinclining to take the helm here. There is a huge difference here, where a bunch of fans - a few of whom may have published material with Atlas - try to piece together a project. Atlas had a set way of doing things, authors were managed by a professional, we had contracts and payment promised to keep us working (apart from the fun of it). Even this way may have been like herding cats sometimes, imagine how it'll be when the project is run by volunteers.

A Roman Tribunal re-write project may need to accept that it will be much looser than a "real" published book, plus less coordinated and consistent. But it could be an interesting challenge to see just how consistent we could make it, and how well the different volunteering authors could work together in creating a new Rome.

59

In terms of Regions of Italy, We should probably go with Lombardy, Verona, the Papal States, Tuscony, the kingdom of Sicily, Corsica & Sardinia, and the Dutchy of Spoleto, unless we want to call the Dutchy by the March of Ancona, which is more obscure but puts emphasis on the political aspects of it being a buffer zone, and later a cat toy in the three way war between Fredrick II, Lomabardy, and the pope.

60

Question: Considering Thebes already has its own canon tribunal book, this rewrite is going to focus only on the Western Roman Empire, right? Nothing that's already in the Theban Tribunal - which is the Eastern Roman Empire until the mid-1400s - is going to appear in this effort, correct?